2003
DOI: 10.17660/actahortic.2003.624.66
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

DNA FINGERPRINTING OF CHRYSANTHEMUM CULTIVARS USING RAPDs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

1
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Ebrahimi et al (2010) also found that in most cases, the cluster results of 13 polymorphic loci were not correlated with the morphological traits of 13 pomegranate (P. granatum) cultivars. In the present study, all of the Japanese cultivars were clustered together in branch I; moreover, the Chinese-specific chrysanthemum germplasm, anemone, and dark red cultivars, closely clustered in branch II, indicating that the cultivars clustered according to the geographical origin, which is consistent with the results of Sehrawat et al (2003) and Shao et al (2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Ebrahimi et al (2010) also found that in most cases, the cluster results of 13 polymorphic loci were not correlated with the morphological traits of 13 pomegranate (P. granatum) cultivars. In the present study, all of the Japanese cultivars were clustered together in branch I; moreover, the Chinese-specific chrysanthemum germplasm, anemone, and dark red cultivars, closely clustered in branch II, indicating that the cultivars clustered according to the geographical origin, which is consistent with the results of Sehrawat et al (2003) and Shao et al (2010).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Martí et al (2002) found that 15 commercial chrysanthemum cultivars could be distinguished from each other through RAPD analysis, and the level of similarity between the cultivars was low. Sehrawat et al (2003) classified 13 chrysanthemum cultivars into two primary groups using RAPD markers and found that the results were consistent with the morphological differences and geographical distributions. In another study, the molecular characterizations of 10 new radiomutants of chrysanthemum were analyzed (Lema-Rumiñska et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…There are many methods that have been used for the classification of chrysanthemums. Previous studies on the classification of chrysanthemums have mainly focused on the quantitative taxonomy (Du, ; Liu & Wang, ), cytotaxonomy (Zhang et al, ), isoenzyme classification research (Roxas et al, ), and molecular marker research (Sehrawat et al, ; Chatterjee et al, ). For example, Liu & Wang () carried out a numerical classification study on 78 chrysanthemum cultivars by analyzing 38 characters, and pointed out that the first and second classification criteria for chrysanthemums were the petal type and the flower head type, which was consistent with the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Especially, cultivars possess similar morphological features can be distinguished by molecular markers very well. In recent years, random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), inter-simple sequence repeats (ISSR), simple sequence repeats (SSR) and sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) markers have been used to identify sports or classify cultivars in chrysanthemum [14] , [18] , [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , [23] , [24] , [25] , [26] , [27] . Among these markers, SSR markers have gained considerable popularity due to their many desirable attributes, including hypervariability, a multiallelic nature, codominant inheritance, reproducibility, relative abundance, extensive genomic coverage (including organellar genomes), chromosome-specific location, amenability to automation, and high-throughput genotyping [28] .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%